- \
- MW: I think we
have explored this option, and it doesn't seem to me to
work.
- ...
- MW: So let me
propose a new approach:
-
- 1. A 4D ontology
(just the core bits that make it 4D).
-
- 2. A 3D ontology
(just the core bits that make it 3D - in this context I like what you
propose)
-
- 3. A mapping
between the two.
-
- 4. A number of
upper domain ontologies that can be added to either a 3D or 4D
core.
(Taxonomies
are likely to be easiest to do this
for).
This means that everyone has to embrace a position that is
metaphysically reductionist, either asserting that: everything is 4D, or
asserting that everything is 3D. Since practically all normal human
beings thing that there are both 3D entities, e.g. people, and 4D
entities, e.g. processes of dying, this would leave the end-result with
very few potential users.
BS
|